Professional Documents
Culture Documents
IQ classification is the practice by IQ test publishers of labeling IQ score ranges with category
names such as "superior" or "average".[1][2][3][4] There are several publishers of tests of cognitive
abilities. No two publishers use exactly the same classification labels, which have changed from
time to time since the beginning of intelligence testing in the early twentieth century.
IQ scores have been derived by two different methods since the advent of
cognitive ability tests. The first method historically was the "ratio IQ", based on
estimating a "mental age" of the test-taker (rounded to a specified number of
years and months), which was then divided by the test-taker's "chronological
age" (rounded to a specified number of years and months). For example, a
mental age score of thirteen years and zero months for a test-taker with the
chronological age ten years and zero months results in a quotient of 1.3 after
doing the division. The division result was then multiplied by 100 so that scores
could be reported without decimal points. Thus the score in the example would
be reported as IQ 130.
The current scoring method for all IQ tests is the "deviation IQ". In this method,
an IQ score of 100 means that the test-taker's performance on the test is at the
median level of performance in the sample of test-takers of about the same
age used to norm the test. An IQ score of 115 means performance one standard
deviation above the median, a score of 85 performance one standard deviation
below the median, and so on.[5] Lewis Terman and other early developers of IQ
tests noticed that most child IQ scores come out to approximately the same
number by either procedure. Deviation IQs are now used for standard scoring
of all IQ tests in large part because they allow a consistent definition of IQ for
both children and adults. By the current "deviation IQ" definition of IQ test
standard scores, about two-thirds of all test-takers obtain scores from 85 to
115, and about 5 percent of the population scores above 125.[6]
Score distribution chart for sample of 905 children tested on 1916 StanfordBinet Test
Historically, even before IQ tests were invented, there were attempts to classify
people into intelligence categories by observing their behavior in daily life.[7]
[8] Those other forms of behavioral observation are still important for validating
classifications based primarily on IQ test scores. Both intelligence classification
by observation of behavior outside the testing room and classification by IQ
testing depend on the definition of "intelligence" used in a particular case and
on the reliability and error of estimation in the classification procedure.
All IQ tests show variation in scores even when the same person takes the
same test over and over again.[9][10] IQ scores also differ for a test-taker taking
tests from more than one publisher at the same age.[11] The various test
publishers do not use uniform names or definitions for IQ score classifications.
All these issues must be kept in mind when interpreting an individual's IQ
scores, because they all can result in different IQ classifications for the same
person at different times.
Contents
[hide]
90
95
111
Brianna 125
110
105
Colin
93
101
Danica 116
127
118
Elpha
93
105
93
Fritz
106
105
105
Georgi 95
100
90
Hector 112
113
103
Imelda 104
96
97
Jose
99
86
78
75
100
101
Keoku 81
Leo
116
124
102
IQ tests generally are reliable enough that most people ages ten and older have
similar IQ scores throughout life.[14] Still, some individuals score very differently
when taking the same test at different times or when taking more than one
kind of IQ test at the same age.[15] For example, many children in the famous
longitudinal Genetic Studies of Genius begun in 1921 by Lewis Terman showed
declines in IQ as they grew up. Terman recruited school pupils based on
referrals from teachers, and gave them his StanfordBinet IQ test. Children with
an IQ above 140 by that test were included in the study. There were 643
children in the main study group. When the students who could be contacted
again (503 students) were retested at high school age, they were found to have
dropped 9 IQ points on average in StanfordBinet IQ. More than two dozen
children dropped by 15 IQ points and six by 25 points or more. Yet parents of
those children thought that the children were still as bright as ever, or even
brighter.[16]
Because all IQ tests have error of measurement in the test-taker's IQ score, a
test-giver should always inform the test-taker of the confidence interval around
the score obtained on a given occasion of taking each test.[17] IQ scores
are ordinal scores and are not expressed in an interval measurement unit.
[18] Besides the inherent error band around any IQ test score because tests are
a "sample of learned behavior", IQ scores can also be misleading because testgivers fail to follow standardized administration and scoring procedures. In
cases of test-giver mistakes, the usual result is that tests are scored too
leniently, giving the test-taker a higher IQ score than the test-taker's
performance justifies. Some test-givers err by showing a "halo effect", with lowIQ individuals receiving IQ scores even lower than if standardized procedures
were followed, while high-IQ individuals receive inflated IQ scores.[19]
IQ classifications for individuals also vary because category labels for IQ score
ranges are specific to each brand of test. The test publishers do not have a
uniform practice of labeling IQ score ranges, nor do they have a consistent
practice of dividing up IQ score ranges into categories of the same size or with
the same boundary scores.[20] Thus psychologists should specify which test was
given when reporting a test-taker's IQ.[21] Psychologists and IQ test authors
recommend that psychologists adopt the terminology of each test publisher
when reporting IQ score ranges.[22][23]
IQ classifications from IQ testing are not the last word on how a test-taker will
do in life, nor are they the only information to be considered for placement in
school or job-training programs. There is still a dearth of information about how
behavior differs between persons with differing IQ scores.[24] For placement in
school programs, for medical diagnosis, and for career advising, factors other
than IQ must also be part of an individual assessment.
The lesson here is that classification systems are necessarily arbitrary
and change at the whim of test authors, government bodies, or
professional organizations. They are statistical concepts and do not
correspond in any real sense to the specific capabilities of any
particular person with a given IQ. The classification systems provide
descriptive labels that may be useful for communication purposes in a
case report or conference, and nothing more.[25]
Alan S. Kaufman and Elizabeth O. Lichtenberger, Assessing
Adolescent and Adult Intelligence (2006)
Very Superior
120129
Superior
110119
High Average
90109
Average
8089
Low Average
7079
Borderline
69 and below
Extremely Low
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for ChildrenFifth Edition (WISC-V) IQ classification
IQ Range ("deviation IQ") IQ Classification[34]
130 and above
Extremely High
120129
Very High
110119
High Average
90109
Average
8089
Low Average
7079
Very Low
69 and below
Extremely Low
Psychologists have proposed alternative language for Wechsler IQ
classifications.[35][36] Note especially that the term "borderline", which implies
being very close to being intellectually disabled, is replaced in the alternative
system by a term that doesn't imply a medical diagnosis.
Alternate Wechsler IQ Classifications (after Groth-Marnat 2009)[37]
Corresponding IQ Range Classifications More value-neutral terms
130+
Very superior
Upper extreme
120129
Superior
110119
High average
High average
90109
Average
Average
8089
Low average
Low average
7079
Borderline
69 and below
The current fifth edition of the StanfordBinet scales (SB5) was developed by
Gale H. Roid and published in 2003 by Riverside Publishing.[26] Unlike scoring on
previous versions of the StanfordBinet test, SB5 IQ scoring is deviation scoring
in which each standard deviation up or down from the norming sample median
score is 15 points from the median score, IQ 100, just like the standard scoring
on the Wechsler tests.
StanfordBinet Fifth Edition (SB5) classification[33][38]
IQ Range ("deviation IQ")
IQ Classification
145160
130144
120129
Superior
110119
High average
90109
Average
8089
Low average
7079
5569
4054
WoodcockJohnson R
WJ III Classification[39]
Superior
111 to 120
High Average
90 to 110
Average
80 to 89
Low Average
70 to 79
Low
Kaufman Tests[edit]
The Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test was developed by Alan S.
Kaufman and Nadeen L. Kaufman and published in 1993 by American Guidance
Service.[26] Kaufman test scores "are classified in a symmetrical, nonevaluative
fashion",[40] in other words the score ranges for classification are just as wide
above the median as below the median, and the classification labels do not
purport to assess individuals.
KAIT 1993 IQ classification
110119
Above average
90109
Average
8089
Below Average
7079
Upper Extreme
116130
Above Average
85115
Average Range
7084
Below Average
4069
Lower Extreme
Superior
110119
High Average
90109
Average
8089
Low Average
7079
Below Average
69 and below
an IQ score with the median standard score set at 100 and 15 standard score
points for each standard deviation up or down from the median. The lowest
possible GCA on the is DASII is 44, and the highest is 175.[46]
GCA
Very low
120129
110119
Above average
90109
Average
8089
Below average
7079
69
classification for score levels, he relied partly on the usage of earlier authors
who wrote, before the existence of IQ tests, on topics such as individuals
unable to care for themselves in independent adult life. Terman's first version
of the StanfordBinet was based on norming samples that included only white,
American-born subjects, mostly from California, Nevada, and Oregon.[51]
Terman's StanfordBinet original (1916) classification[52][53]
IQ Range ("ratio
IQ Classification
IQ")
Above 140
120140
110120
Superior intelligence
90110
8090
7080
Below 70
Definite feeble-mindedness
Rudolph Pintner proposed a set of classification terms in his 1923
book Intelligence Testing: Methods and Results.[4] Pintner commented that
psychologists of his era, including Terman, went about "the measurement of an
individual's general ability without waiting for an adequate psychological
definition."[54] Pintner retained these terms in the 1931 second edition of his
book.[55]
Pintner 1923 IQ classification[4]
IQ Range ("ratio IQ") IQ Classification
130 and above
Very Superior
120129
Very Bright
110119
Bright
90109
Normal
8089
Backward
7079
Borderline
Albert Julius Levine and Louis Marks proposed a broader set of categories in
their 1928 book Testing Intelligence and Achievement.[56][57] Some of the
terminology in the table came from contemporary terms for classifying
individuals with intellectual disabilities.
Levine and Marks 1928 IQ classification[56][57]
IQ Range ("ratio IQ") IQ Classification
175 and over
Precocious
150174
Very superior
125149
Superior
115124
Very bright
105114
Bright
95104
Average
8594
Dull
7584
Borderline
5074
Morons
2549
Imbeciles
024
Idiots
The second revision (1937) of the StanfordBinet test retained "quotient IQ"
scoring, despite earlier criticism of that method of reporting IQ test standard
scores.[58] The term "genius" was no longer used for any IQ score range.[59] The
second revision was normed only on children and adolescents (no adults), and
only "American-born white children".[60]
Terman's StanfordBinet Second Revision (1937) classification[59]
IQ Range ("ratio IQ") IQ Classification
140 and over
Very superior
120139
Superior
110119
High average
90109
Normal or average
8089
Low average
7079
Borderline defective
Below 60
Mentally defective
A data table published later as part of the manual for the 1960 Third Revision
(Form L-M) of the StanfordBinet test reported score distributions from the
1937 second revision standardization group.
Score Distribution of StanfordBinet 1937 Standardization Group[59]
IQ Range ("ratio IQ") Percent of Group
160169
0.03
150159
0.2
140149
1.1
130139
3.1
120129
8.2
110119
18.1
100109
23.5
9099
23.0
8089
14.5
7079
5.6
6069
2.0
5059
0.4
4049
0.2
3039
0.03
Very Superior
2.2
120127
Superior
6.7
111119
Bright Normal
16.1
91110
Average
50.0
8090
Dull normal
16.1
6679
Borderline
6.7
65 and below
Defective
2.2
In 1958, Wechsler published another edition of his book Measurement and
Appraisal of Adult Intelligence. He revised his chapter on the topic of IQ
classification and commented that "mental age" scores were not a more valid
way to score intelligence tests than IQ scores.[63] He continued to use the same
classification terms.
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales 1958 Classification[64]
IQ Range ("deviation IQ") IQ Classification (Theoretical) Percent Included
128 and over
Very Superior
2.2
120127
Superior
6.7
111119
Bright Normal
16.1
91110
Average
50.0
8090
Dull normal
16.1
6679
Borderline
6.7
65 and below
Defective
2.2
The third revision (Form L-M) in 1960 of the StanfordBinet IQ test used the
deviation scoring pioneered by David Wechsler. For rough comparability of
scores between the second and third revision of the StanfordBinet test,
scoring table author Samuel Pinneau set 100 for the median standard score
level and 16 standard score points for each standard deviation above or below
that level. The highest score obtainable by direct look-up from the standard
scoring tables (based on norms from the 1930s) was IQ 171 at various
chronological ages from three years six months (with a test raw score "mental
age" of six years and two months) up to age six years and three months (with a
test raw score "mental age" of ten years and three months).[65] The
classification for StanfordBinet L-M scores does not include terms such as
"exceptionally gifted" and "profoundly gifted" in the test manual itself. David
Freides, reviewing the StanfordBinet Third Revision in 1970 for the
Very superior
120139
Superior
110119
High average
90109
Normal or average
8089
Low average
7079
Borderline defective
Below 60
Mentally defective
The first edition of the WoodcockJohnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities was
published by Riverside in 1977. The classifications used by the WJ-R Cog were
"modern in that they describe levels of performance as opposed to offering a
diagnosis."[39]
WoodcockJohnson R
WJ-R Cog 1977 Classification[39]
IQ Score
Superior
111 to 120
High Average
90 to 110
Average
80 to 89
Low Average
70 to 79
Low
Very Superior
2.6
2.2
120129
Superior
6.9
6.7
110119
High Average
16.6
16.1
90109
Average
49.1
50.0
8089
Low Average
16.1
16.1
7079
Borderline
6.4
6.7
Mentally
2.3
2.2
Retarded
The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC) was developed by Alan
below 70
Range of Standard
Scores
130+
Theoretical Percent
Included
Upper Extreme
2.3
2.2
120129
Well Above
Average
7.4
6.7
110119
Above Average
16.7
16.1
90109
Average
49.5
50.0
8089
Below Average
16.1
16.1
7079
Well Below
Average
6.1
6.7
below 70
Lower Extreme
2.1
2.2
The fourth revision of the StanfordBinet scales (S-B IV) was developed by
Thorndike, Hagen, and Sattler and published by Riverside Publishing in 1986. It
retained the deviation scoring of the third revision with each standard deviation
from the median being defined as a 16 IQ point difference. The S-B IV adopted
new classification terminology. After this test was published, psychologist
Nathan Brody lamented that IQ tests had still not caught up with advances in
research on human intelligence during the twentieth century.[68]